I saw the following on Michael Wurzer’s FBS Blog as he analyzed the settlement between the Department of Justice and the National Association of REALTORSand had to pass it along.
Is it too much of a stretch to say this is an extension of the basic premise that “markets work”? I don’t think so.
I suspect the reason the litgation was able to be settled was because no one really cares about this issue any more. The listings are flowing everywhere already, referral fees and other models are developing regardless and the main issue now is effectiveness and cost and not who is providing what service. Perhaps the litigation bought some time for a variety of competitors but I think the more likely conclusion is that the market just found the solutions around the litigation, making it irrelevant enough that a settlement could be crafted.
Even as the litigation dragged on, the markets – in this case the market for dissemination of listings – adapted, evolved and found their own solution.
Commentary’s been pretty consistent across the web … the only item I’ve noticed different was a brief discussion of divorced commissions, which had nothing whatsoever to do with the case. That’s been the most amazing aspect of this case – folks twisting the very, very basic premise and purpose to fit whatever they’re personal beef may be.[tags]NAR, DOJ, Phoenix real estate[/tags]